London Ontario Bike Bylaw Restructure Proposal

By Ian Gifford – 08/20/2012 edited 09/11/2012

Note: This is something I came up with in August. Now that the discussions in council (regarding 14 year olds and younger on side walks) have surfaced I wanted to see what other Londoners think of some of these ideas. Can we make any of them work and can we do it to make our roads safer now? Feel free to comment but constructively please. Negative comments do nothing to advance the solutions required to make cyclists feel safer in our city right now. We need "solutions to the problems, not problems to the solutions" - Gil Penalosa

Gil Penalosa gives a great talk on car vs pedestrian vs cycle traffic in the world's cities HERE in this video

New York City made cycling infrastructure changes happen virtually overnight. See what they have done in this video here

The Florida Bicycle association made this education site here as provided by a commenter below. 

Overview: The following is a list of suggestions for changes in Bicycling related traffic bylaws for London Ontario while future changes in road infrastructure pertaining to cyclists are yet to be realized. The hope is that with minor changes to the way cyclists use the roads and pathways within the city, that public and police perception of cyclists will alter and a balance between all three of drivers, pedestrians and Cyclists can be met.

Reasoning: Cyclists face a wide variety of obstacles in London, Ontario every day from unkempt streets, to littered pathways/shoulders (glass, dirt, trash etc.) and aggressive drivers, many which suffer from a disdain and disrespect for cyclists. Driver perceptions of the average cyclist can cause many to be aggressive towards the cyclist ultimately advancing “road rage” between the two parties and on some occasions resulting in accidents with the cyclists largely becoming the injured party.

In London’s current state, there are many multi use pathways that prove to be very good for recreational use and in some instances good for daily commutes to various parts of the city. However, arterial streets in London (ie: Highbury, Adelaide, Oxford, Dundas, Wharncliffe, Commissioners) are largely without painted bike lanes or Boulevard style lanes up and away from the flow of traffic. Bikers like me often feel unsafe and thereby take to the sidewalk while that can lead to fines from Police and/or aggression from drivers and pedestrians.

The hope of amending/altering some city bylaws and how they pertain to cyclists is to change the public perception and to allow within the legal system for riders to take to the sidewalks in a safe manner, without worry of repercussions. There would be obvious need for exceptions to these amendments and will be listed accordingly. Such exceptions would include where a bike lane on the road exists and/or sharrows are painted into the streets and signs indicating all to “share the road” or that “this is a designated bike route” exist.

The biggest need in cycling culture change is the acceptance of cyclists as co-owners of the roads and pathways. Alternately there are cyclists that are in need of changing their own methods of using the streets and pathways. It’s a situation where respect will likely need to be given in order to be gained back
.

Another thing that needs to be acknowledged on the path to equalisation on the roads is that current road laws are not ultimately created with the cyclist in mind and are largely outdated and not inclusive to the cyclist. With minor change in many of these laws we can have equalisation for all users of roads and pathways and make our traffic system safe and enjoyable for all.

Bylaws: Current London, Ontario bylaws restrict cyclists from riding on sidewalks anywhere within the city. Cyclists often will ride these sidewalks at the risk of being stopped by police and fined. These laws are restrictive to cyclists who want to or need to ride on major arteries where the lane size and volume of traffic makes it unsafe to navigate freely for the slower moving cyclist.

Proposed amendment 1: Eliminate bylaw altogether (with restrictions for cyclist use) and change nomenclature from “sidewalk” to “roadside pathways”. The idea of changing nomenclature is to change public perception of how these walks may be used. The idea of eliminating fines for sidewalk use with exceptions will allow for the safe passage throughout the city without threat of being overtaken by high volume traffic.

Restrictions:

·        Cyclists using the sidewalk must pro-actively and voluntarily demonstrate knowledge of bicycle safety. Helmets, bells, lights, reflectors and well kept braking systems should be present at all times. The exceptions would be subject to evaluation by bylaw enforcement and/or Police officers.

·         Children under the age of ___ are exempt at all times from sidewalk/roadside pathway bylaws. Children must always be wearing CSA approved helmets as per current laws.

·        Streets where there are lines/sharrows/lanes for cyclists must always be used instead of sidewalks by cyclists above the age of ___. Any cyclists found in breach of this will be subject to current fines under the established bylaws.

·         Downtown core sidewalks are exempt except where major bike parking areas exist (ie Citi Plaza on Wellington Rd, between King and York streets) where bikes should be cruising at no more than 10km/hr for 30 feet on either side of the bike park.

Proposed Amendment 2: the “CSEP” or the “Cyclist Special Exceptions Permit”. This would be a voluntary permit with an annual fee. Once a year London cyclists would be encouraged to go to an authorized city bicycle dealer/repair shop for the purpose of a bike inspection and “License” issuing.

The License can be had in one of two forms depending on cost or preference by bylaw enforcers. The first form could be a bike mounted numbered license while the second could be a photo identification card. This license/card would be null and void if certain requirements are not met at the time of use.

Requirements:

·        Cyclists must demonstrate knowledge of the rules of the road and basic bicycle use.

·        Cyclists must have a bicycle equipped with standard safety equipment including well maintained brake systems, reflectors, lights (exemptions during daylight hours), and potentially helmets.

·        Cyclists will only be required to have this card/license past the age of ___

      Allowances:

·        The CSEP allows for cyclists to ride on designated sidewalks at all times (amendments to this can be for peak traffic flows only on certain roads) without fear of repercussion/fines by bylaw/traffic enforcement agents. In the instance that a cyclist is stopped by said enforcement officers the card/license may be presented and the officer at their discretion can exempt the rider from fines providing safety measures are being practiced and displayed by the cyclist.

·       

           The CSEP is voluntary and invalid in cases where the card or license is not with the cyclist during their ride thereby subjecting the cyclists to all fines/repercussions under current bylaws.

·        The CSEP is dependant on reasonable use of these pathways by ALL cyclists. If cyclists are found in neglect of basic and standard safe cycling practises, all benefits of the CSEP are voided.

·         The CSEP may entitle the holder to special discounts from participating bike shops/repair shops at the discretion of said shops. A page on the city of London website could direct cyclists that hold the CSEP to the shops that participate in the CSEP program.

·       

           The CSEP will allow users to attend city run cycling events (assuming any are made in the future) like bike rodeos, cyclist town hall style meetings and membership in online CSEP forums.

Exceptions:

·         The CSEP is not a “Get out of jail free” card. It does not abide by reckless and dangerous cycling. Any user Found in violation of standard laws pertaining to cyclists may be subject to a revocation of the CSEP by London enforcement officers and be refused future CSE Permits at the discretion of the CSEP administrators.

·         The CSEP is subject to specially mapped areas of London at all times. The main purpose of the CSEP is to allow for safe passage on sidewalks/roadside pathways of mainly Arterial routes until such time as cycling infrastructure is introduced whereby exemptions will change and the exemptions map will reflect the new lanes (or other types of cycling infrastructure).

Fees: The CSEP, while being voluntary, will come with an administrative fee that can (at the city managers discretions) be used towards cycling infrastructure and maintenance with potential for city run cycling awareness programs and bike rodeos etc. These fees would be determined based on projections of use, infrastructure and maintenance costs and overall program participation. 

LeGiff's own Vegetarian Chili

LeGiff’s own Vegetarian Chili – hot!

1 onion chopped

2 Jalapeno’s chopped - to reduce heat, clean and seed one of them.

1 sweet red or yellow pepper diced

4 cloves garlic – chopped

2/3 pkg of sliced white or crimini mushrooms

3 tbsp lime juice

2 tbsp olive oil

1 19oz can black beans drained & rinsed

1 19oz can red kidney beans drained & rinsed

2 28oz cans diced tomatoes

1 23oz can (680ml) tomato sauce

1 pkg Yves Veggie Ground round

2 tbsp chili powder

2 tsp cumin seed ground

2 tsp black pepper

¼ tsp cayenne pepper

Salt to taste. Add this very late so you can taste how much salt comes out from the canned vegetables first.

Sautee Garlic, onions, mushroom and peppers in olive oil till onions are translucent add spices and lime juice and stir to blend. Add beans tomatoes and tomato sauce and bring to a boil, reduce heat and add Yves veggie ground round (no pre-heating required) and simmer for a long time stirring occasionally until chili has reached your desired consistency. 

This is a hearty chili high in protein and fibre. The nice thing about cooking with fresh jalapenos to add the heat as opposed to a lot of powdered spices is that it’s a cleaner burn on the palate. For people who find it too hot, stir in a tbsp of sour cream to mute the heat.

Chana Masala recipe

This is one of my favorite recipes of all time. Instead of cayenne I chop a dried chili and sautee it with the onions, garlic and ginger. 

Chana Masala - (channa = chickpeas, masala = spice blend)

2 tbsp butter (or vegetable oil to make recipe vegan)

1 medium Spanish onion chopped

4 cloves garlic minced

1” piece ginger peeled and grated

3 tbsp lemon juice

1 28oz can tomatoes chopped roughly in can

1 19oz can chickpeas drained and rinsed

2 tsp whole cumin

2 tsp ground cumin

1 tbsp turmeric

2 tsp ground coriander seed

1 tsp black pepper

1/2 tsp cayenne pepper

1 tsp salt (or as needed in late stages of recipe)

1 tsp garam masala

Over medium heat melt butter/heat oil and sautee ginger, garlic and onions till onions are soft. Add spices, except salt and garam masala, and add lemon juice stirring as to not allow spices to burn. When well blended add chickpeas and tomatoes with juice, stir and bring to a boil. Reduce heat and simmer for approximately an hour stirring occasionally. In last 5 minutes of cooking add salt (if needed) and the garam masala.

Serve on basmati rice or mashed potatoes and garnish with chopped red chili or a dollop of plain yogurt or sour cream (to mute the heat)

Taco Wars - Here we go again

 The following is a letter written to Taco Bell. Last time I posted something about them it was that they were charging 60 cents extra to substitute their beef with beans. I wrote them and it got reversed. This time they are frying french fries in chicken contaminated fats and not providing a warning to people. That's disgusting and it needs to stop. This is not a new battle for me. I once took on a local diner when I found bacon in my fries and they eventually closed up. (not as a result of me I am sure but bad business practices will bite you in the ass every time.)

___________________________________________________________________________

To Taco Bell:

This is not the first time I have contacted you about concerns about how you treat your vegetarian customers and I find it disheartening that I have to do it again.

I have been eating at a mall based Taco Bell for some time now fairly regularly. About a year ago they took on a "KFC Express" and just recently told me that chicken is being prepared in both vats that are available for frying. This means of course that fried potato products are being cross contaminated with animal proteins. This is not acceptable.

Do you not realize how many vegetarians eat at taco bell for the bean burritos and tacos substituted with beans? Now a simple vegetable like potato fries is no longer available to us because of your inability to see the need for separate fryers.

And do you have signage up to tell people that your fries may be contaminated with chicken fats? No you don't and that is shameful and appalling. How many times do we vegetarians have to threaten to boycott your restaurants and start national campaigns against you till you start taking us into consideration before you make dumb moves like this?

I would like you to fix this or a national campaign is exactly what I'll start and the first place I will turn to will be PETA. They already don't like what KFC's practices are but to find out that Taco Bell is contaminating their vegetables and not telling people will likely start some fresh protests and action.

Come on Taco Bell. Your food is good. Your customer service is Ok, but your foresight on decision making is lacking. You need to change your approach to food and start including EVERYBODY.

Please fix this so I can enjoy my fries supreme again. It's tough enough as it is to find quick palatable options that fit my diet. Fries may not be the most healthy thing as it is but even vegetarians are allowed a guilty pleasure now and then, no?


Ian

A letter to Jian Ghomeshi about Atheists & religion

this letter was in response to this show...


Hi Jian,

I have to say that I found today's discussion with Alain de Botton somewhat charming and quaint, with the ideas that atheists could borrow from religion. Myself, before renouncing religion overall (I call myself a non-theist as I am devoid of any theistic needs and abhor the christian bred stigmas that surround being an "Atheist") I was deeply involved in the church with youth groups and a youth choir which I toured around Ontario and into Michigan with. It was in those days of singing about Christ and God that I started to question the things I was being taught and was singing about, yet even after I had made my personal decisions on what I really believed, I still found much joy in singing in the choirs.

When the arguments come up with believers about how I live with my particular points of view, which is essentially that at the end of it all I am merely worm fodder with a limited legacy to follow me, I generally tell people I just don't have the time for it. I don't have the time in a day to wonder if there could be a omnipotent being trying to direct my actions. I don't have the time to wonder if my actions will get me into the nice post death world or nasty post death world, I am too busy living a full life where the days are short enough as it is. I really just don't buy the idea of a post death world and don't see merit in convincing people that they should live for that. See ya, bye bye, It was nice to meet you and have you play all that nice music for me and break bread and all that but I am done.

As to needing some sort of moral compass to live by, my parents did a pretty good job of teaching me to see right from wrong without having to make me believe it was "God's will". Sure they started off with the whole Santa Claus scene whereby if I am on good behaviour I will get presents at the end of the year. My turning point was seeing God as a Santa for grown ups and just like Santa Claus there's a point in time where we have to recognize the teachings as merely a tool or guideline and that eventually we have to move away from it and essentially "grow up".

When I was with the choir we saw religion from all sides. Even though the choir "Kids for Christ" was largely drawn from members of the United Church, we had members with Catholic and Anglican and Presbyterian backgrounds as well so we played for a variety of congregations including Baptist which was a rather interesting congregation to be alongside. 

It was in the baptist church where for the first time I saw people weeping in the church, saying "thank you Jesus" with every second breath and clutching their bibles very close to their hearts, behaviours which I found to be extreme and nearly fanatical. A friend turned and looked at me and I dramatically punched my choir book twice to indicate "bible thumpers" and my buddy nearly lost it during the sermon. He being the son of a United minister was also questioning the teachings of his family/church and I can imagine it was tougher for him than me to work through. 

I am certain that this kind of behaviour is not what Alain is suggesting that Atheists or Non-theists need to adopt. Sure I miss the singing I got to do every Sunday but I don't miss the stuffy, sterile and boring old hymns. Sure I miss the sense of community within the church with the nice finger sandwich and orange drink luncheons in the church basements or halls after the service but I don't miss the "who's dressed best for god this week?" air of judgement that surrounds it. I've done pretty well in my life thus far in examining cause & effect in relation to my actions and interactions. I really don't need the pastoral patronisations of what's essentially counselling for the masses, telling me weekly in an uber P.C. manner how to handle situations that come up in my day to day. 

I just don't need any of that to feel happy with myself and my life and that I am doing the right things and that I will go to my grave at peace with all I have accomplished or may have left unfinished. If somebody invented a church of atheism or maybe even a weekly atheist group would I attend? Probably not. I mean I can discuss every day life with people at will and don't need to join a group to be able to do it. I don't try to convert people to my way of thinking but I'll definitely explain it to anyone that asks. I merely exist. I breathe. I break bread with good people and the people who need it most. I pour my neighbour's wine glass more full than my own. I am the first to help in the kitchen when the meal someone else made for me is finished.

Maybe those ideals were bred into me through my Christian teachings or maybe it's just a well established sense of right and wrong. "Do unto others as you will have them do unto you" is universal, it's not Christian or Muslim or Buddhist yet while it does exist in those religions the notion belongs to all of us. 

So essentially I see atheism as being devoid of any religious trappings. A-theism (atheism) relates to theism as A-sexuality (asexuality) relates to gender with the "A" part indicating an absense. A-theism does not translate to A-morality either. I consider myself to be very moralistic while in some ways anarchistic. I believe in a global brotherhood and sisterhood that can exist without a subscription to any one set of beliefs and that we all deserve to be judged on our treatment of others and not on the frequency of our "worship of God's laws" whoever/whatever that god may be. 

So thank you both for having that discussion. It was intriguing and fun but now I will go back to being the heathen that believers in a particular deity might see me as. I am truly not bothered by it unless it diminishes how someone hears my voice and my thoughts and then I have to wonder what their belief is costing them and society overall?

Purple and Gold - A JLC review by @LeGiff

One of the benefits of growing up in Point Edward, an hour away from “the Motor City”, was the wealth of radio stations we’d get. College radio from Port Huron, nearly a dozen stations from Detroit and Windsor, 2 or 3 from Sarnia and fm96 from London, provided us with all of the variety our music hungry minds could handle.

One station I remember stumbling upon was a short lived funk station in the high hundreds in fm. I can’t remember its name (“the Jam” perhaps?) but I remember discovering a lot of great funk, soul and R&B music on there.

This was the station that introduced me to “Grand Master Flash and the Furious 5”, “The Time”, Rick James and of course Prince.  This was just prior to the music video craze so I got all of my music from radio or raiding my Brother Rob’s music collection. Shortly after I had discovered Prince tunes on this station from Controversy and Dirty Mind, Rob brought me 1999 to borrow. He never got it back.

For my sister Jo-Anne and me, it was like nothing we had heard. It was sultry, funky, danceable, “sing-alongable” and just naughty enough to make our mom cringe whenever we dug the album out. It was super sexy before we had any notion of individual sexuality.  But when Purple Rain came out almost 2 years later with the movie release, I was at the store buying the LP on release day.

“Joee” and I begged our mom to let us see the movie which was surprisingly PG and at 14 I could take my then 11 year old sister to.  Every word of every song became ingrained in our young minds. It was a musical bond between highly rivalrous siblings that saw us become and to this day remain best friends.

Naturally when we heard that Prince was coming to John Labatt Center in London, Joee immediately texted me to make sure I knew about it. Sadly with Jo-Anne just having been laid off and myself not having a lot of freelance work coming in, we didn’t think that either could afford to go. Jo-Anne had a surprise of 2 tickets greet her in her mailbox from a secret benefactor. Then she suggested to me that I try for the twitter “JLC Reviewer” program so I thought I’d give it a shot.

Without going to great details on what I did or if or why I deserved to be a JLC reviewer, we all know that I got the “job” & this is why you’re reading this now. So I have to thank Jo-Anne who introduced me to it and to all at JLC for allowing me the opportunity and especially Chris Campbell for all he’s done with the JLC Reviewer campaigns.  Prince was one of those concerts on my “bucket list” along with The Police & RUSH and I am proud to have been a part of music history in London.

So when I found out I was going to be a JLC Reviewer I had to figure out who would be my guest for the show. Of course a mere mention of the show on Facebook and Twitter garnered dozens of queries from friends from all over, one as far away as Winnipeg! I was trying to think of who was as big a fan of his purple holiness as me and looked at the 1999 cover. Brother Rob’s 1999 LP cover! I sent a text for him to call me.

“Rob, I know it’s a busy time for you, but can you be in London for Dec. 5^th? It’s a Monday”

“I doubt it very much” he says “Why, what’s going on?”

So I told him about the extra seat for Prince and he responded with an emphatic “YES! Why the hell not? I can make it work. How much do you want for the ticket?” I told him I didn’t want a dime. It was as much a gift to him as it was me.  And so for 2 weeks the excitement built and then there we were at the John Labatt Center.

I got a call on show day from Chris who was part of selecting the JLC reviewers.  He explained what he liked to try and do for the reviewers normally but that things were different for the Prince show. He had some high up seats and he had some seats right beside the stage in a cabaret style with tables. While I might have been thrilled to sit at the stage side with my brother, I couldn’t help thinking that’s a spot for you and your sig. other. I knew that the other reviewer was taking his fiancée so instead of a coin toss and potential disappointment; I said “Give them to Brian and say ‘Happy Engagement from Ian’”.

You can read Brian’s reaction here.

Our seats ended up being in the 300s. I was actually quite happy with them as on a couple of the 3 other occasions there were limitations to the view I got of the stage.  RUSH was pretty good as we were center of the rink & midway up, but for Merle Haggard we were right at the side of the stage with obstructions and not very good sound and then for Alexis On Fire we were on the floor at the back with not a very  good view at all. 

These seats were fine as we got a full view of all of Prince’s custom “symbol” stage and everyone on it, great sight lines to all the stage screens and prime location for sound quality which overall was much better than almost any show I’ve seen at the JLC previously.

The show format was pretty intriguing. It started off with Prince’s band introducing themselves with a very soulful, gospel like Bob Dylan cover ("To make you feel my love") sung by Prince’s 3 backing vocalists. The 2^nd song in, Prince came out and immediately got the crowd into a sing along.  Next up was “When Doves Cry” and Prince got the crowd to sing a lot of the words for him.  The energy was instantly electric and the audience was totally captivated.

From the first note the band didn’t skip a beat for what I counted to be nearly 45 minutes. When they did stop the silence between tunes was brief and Prince and “the New Power Generation” were back into full swing. 

Somewhere in that opening set he played the opening licks of “Darling Nikki” to screams and Prince chuckles “Just testing the house y’all”.

The overall show format reminded me of a Vegas style review. Everything was well timed and seamless. People would bring Prince his signature Fender telecaster guitars (I don’t remember seeing the famous “Cloud Guitar” once!) and when it was his time to solo he proved why he is so popular among music fans and musicians alike. His solo for Purple Rain was incredible and skillful and was put up on the screens as a close up on his hands.

Everything about the show was sexy and scintillating. He would often ask the light guys to illuminate the house and when we could see the floor below it was littered with bodies gyrating and writhing with arms flailing about. Every once in a while I would glance around me and the people surrounding me were doing much the same despite the limited room.

Prince was playful and interactive with the crowd as were the crew and band as evidenced by lights going on and off prior to the show & encores, or band members tossing T-shirts and tambourines into the crowd. He was always changing up what instrument he’d play if any at all. At one point he took the bass from “Niva” and did a kick ass solo. 

For Nothing Compares 2 U he took to the piano. At one point as he announces “Mr. Hayes” his keyboardist for many years and says “We bring you real musicians playing real music!”

The set had many hits; Pop Life, When Doves Cry, Dance Music Sex Romance, Raspberry Beret etc. and then a few unexpected covers like Michael Jackson’s “Don’t Stop Till You Get Enough”, Sarah McLachlans's "Angel" plus the opening Garth Brooks hit written by Bob Dylan.

For me as a musician and an audio professional, I see shows in a different light. I criticize shows on overall production and performance values. I can’t say when I last saw such a polished 2 ½ hours straight of performance. It highlighted a band that is highly skilled and experienced and that love what they do night in and night out. His technical crew were obviously also highly skilled at what they do and it made for a pleasing experience right from the start.

So thanks ever so much once again to the John Labatt Center for allowing me to be a part of what was really a dream come true for me and providing the forum to express myself about it.  I was honoured and privileged to be there to see one of my true heroes and to share my love for him with over 8000 others.

Occupying Myself - Thoughts on the New Revolution

Occupying Myself – Oct 28^th 2011

“I don't read no papers, and I don't listen to radios either. I know the world's been shaved by a drunken barber, and I don't have to read it.” – The Colonel – Meet John Doe - 1941

To date I have been sitting on the outside of the “occupy” movement just watching what unfolded.

I find it interesting that so many millions of people have come together under this umbrella concept, one that is not defined by any one mandate other than it is “us” talking peacefully to and about “them”. They are what are being referred to as “the 1%”, being those that hold the bulk of the wealth worldwide while many of the 99% live in impoverished states or largely as a varying middle class. The class distinctions are becoming steadily blurred to be simply “rich and poor”, “haves and have nots”.

I have had no real voice in this movement yet as I have merely sat and watched those around me take part through either social media or by attending the encampments and marches taking place in cities like London or Toronto or any other place that social media has conspired to create such an event.

I have been watching with sheer glee at the utter befuddlement of politicians and the media at the lack of leadership and a clear cut mandate by the people involved in the Occupy movements. I have “gotten” why we need this protest and when asked to define it I could only give marginal responses based on things I have read from folks involved “It’s about the 99% vs the 1%” or “it’s about banks cheating people out of their money” or whatever I had in my head from it all that day.

I listened to a call in radio show that my sister Jo-Anne and a friend named Eric were on after they had attended a Toronto “occupy” event. They described a peaceful atmosphere where people shared stories and ideas. The radio host decried the lack of a leader and my sister said that if a leader is needed, through discussion and continuance of the movement, a leader may just emerge!

The radio host also asked my sister why we cannot just rely on our elected officials to do the right thing when we have just had elections in all offices over the past year. This question made my eye twitch and I wasn’t sure why. Today it hit me.

I saw a picture of an older woman holding a placard that read “I don’t mind you being rich. I mind you buying my government!” and that was the trigger of the epiphany. This is what the movement is about. It’s about the poor not having a say because they cannot afford it. Sure we can go out and vote and elect the framework of the government but we don’t influence the actual work that gets done by the government because the votes in parliament are being influenced by lobbyists who are in the house, put there by corporations and wealthy individuals. There’s a saying “money talks” but it could also be said that “Money walks all over anyone that does not possess it.”

We the 99% don’t need a single voice, we all just need to speak as one.

We the 99% don’t need a tonne of money we just need government to respond to the real people in their homes and hospitals and schools and not just those with the money.

We the 99% need a government that recognizes and respects the rights of it’s people to protest corporations, government etc. through whatever peaceful means necessary including legal strikes without the government legislating non-essential industry back to work.

We the 99% don’t need any one leader, we need the governments that we select to act on what WE the people need to help us survive and not the CEOs of giant banks and corporations whispering to the governments that THEY know what WE need and what is in OUR best interest.

We the 99% need the banks and corporations that control mortgage rates, gas prices, laws, food production to back off and work towards a healthy sustainable economy for all.

We the 99% shouldn’t be forced to eat crap food because that’s all we can afford. Major corporations make it so that crap food is all that people can afford and when it affects their health, it’s the corporations who work in the privatized health sectors that are still reaping all the profits.

We the 99% are seeking to end the cycle of rich wielding the carrots in front of the people that those rich persons/non-persons (i.e. corporations and banks) use for their blood and sweat to make their almighty dollar while the rest of us try to scrape two nickels together.

While this movement has no real true figure head that serves as a scape goat for all of the media and the rich’s counter arguments and shady politics, there are many in the public spotlight that are lending their voices. Celebrities and activists like Harry Shearer (actor), Tom Morello (musician), Michael Moore (film maker/writer), Al Gore (former US VP) and thousands of others are speaking in favour of the “Occupy” movements popping up around the world.

Folks in Tahrir square in Egypt were showing support for their American cousins and friends involved in the different cities that have embraced this movement just last week.

This is more than just a protest. This is unrest. This is people genuinely unhappy with the state of things as a whole but being nice about it to start. This is what can certainly turn into a full out revolt if the politicians and corporations don’t start listening to what the people are saying. When that happens, a leader will emerge and likely not with a megaphone but rather with a large stick or a gun or whatever else they can find. Then governments will learn the true meaning of “We, the people!”

This is why we cannot have one clear leader for the media and corporations who control them to perform a character assassination upon. This is what makes the CEO’s and media moguls most angry about this whole thing. Because how can you smear millions and millions of ideas and voices that all say something unique but are directed towards the same problem? That is, that the poor can’t afford to pay to have their voice heard and needs/demands met when banks, media and corporations have the money to make their voices seem the loudest.